





















<*^ aO 












•*»- C° / 




\* .. -^ ••" -^ 











* r\ 



< V ^ 









. * -^VT* --^i 
















^> • • • 




,^i,\ co\c^^% y^^^-X .^°^:3>'> . 



^^°^ \^^.^ ^^-^^ 













av ">1k • 




**.>* .*aife\ "^^-^.^ :m£'^ %..*^ /jjfe,\ **-„./ /- 




i°-^^^ V 











v/^«i- 







vv 



vn<3' 














J^^ 















1 



NORTH CAROLINA'S PRIORITY 

IN THE DEMAND FOR A 

DECLARATION OF 

INDEPENDENCE 



THE RESOLUTION OF THE CONGRESS AT 
HAUFAX, APRIL 12, 1776, AND ITS INFLU- 
ENCE ON THE SENTIMENT FOR INDE- 
PENDENCE IN THE UNITED COLONIES 




BY 



R. D. W. CONNOR 

Secretary of the North Carolina Hiatorical CommiMion 



North Carolina's Priority in the Demand 
for a Declaration of Independence 



The Resolution of the Congress at Halifax, April 1 2, 1 776, 
and its Influence on the Sentiment for Independ- 
ence in the United Colonies 



BY 
^ C 

Secretary of the North Carolina Historical Commission 



R. D. W. CONNOR 



.^, 



Reprinted from the South Atlantic Quarterly, July, 1909 



GlfS 



^>' 



if\U V 1 ,9 i tJ 



North Carolina's Priority in the Demand 
for Independence 

By R. D. W, Connor 

Secretary of the North Carolina Historical Commission 

A well-known essayist, in a study of "The Mecklenburg Decla- 
ration of Independence" says, with reference to the movement for 
a national Declaration of Independence: "To-day the consensus 
of critical opinion is adverse to the claims of those who would 
give the 'Old North State' priority in this bold and important 
step, and the conviction is wide-spread that the Mecklenburg 
Declaration is of the stuff of which myths are made."* The writer 
here falls into an error too common among students of American 
history, for which North Carolinians are primarily responsible. 
"The claims of those who would give the 'Old North State' prior- 
ty" in the demand for independence, are not dependent on any 
thing that occurred, or is supposed to have occurred, at Charlotte 
in May of 1775; and the true basis for these claims is not aifected 
at all whether a Declaration of Independence was made on the 
day and in the words claimed, or not. Theyrest on another event, 
about which there can be no dispute, which in historical impor- 
tance and interest takes precedence of either the Declaration of 
May 20 or the Resolutions of May 31, viz., the adoption by the 
Provincial Congress, April 12, 1776, of the resolution authorizing 
the delegates from North Carolina in the Continental Congress to 
vote for a Declaration of Independence. Unfortunately for correct 
historical perspective the "acrimonious controversy" which has 
been waged for more than three-quarters of a century about "The 
Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence," has attracted more 
attention to that event than its importance deserves, and has 
tended to throw into obscurity the more significant action of the 
Congress at Halifax in April of the next year. Whatever action 
was taken at Charlotte in May, 1775, was but the action of a 
single frontier county, and was binding on nobody; the Resolu- 
tion of April 12, on the other hand, was the voice of the province 

*H. Addington Bruce: "New Light on the Mecklenburg Declaration," in The 
North American Review, July, 1906. 



[ 4 ] 

expressed through its chosen representatives in Congress assem- 
bled. It is on this latter action that North Carolina's claims to 
priority in the demand for a national Declaration of Independence 
must be maintained. 

This claim must not be considered as an assertion that the idea 
of independence originated in North Carolina. The very absurd- 
it}^ of such a claim would refute it. In fact it cannot be said that 
the idea of independence "originated" anj where: it was agro wth, 
and was present, unconsciously, in the minds of political thinkers 
and leaders long before England's conduct crj^stallized it into 
conscious thought. Prophecies and academical discussions of the 
possibility of an independent American nation, were not uncom- 
mon, either in Europe or America, for some years before the out- 
break of the Revolution; but it may be safeh' stated that no 
serious, definite thought or plan of separation from the mother 
country took shape in the minds of even the most advanced poli- 
tical thinkers until after the struggle over the Stamp Act. There 
may be found, it is true, certain expressions in the literature of 
the period which may possibly seem to support a contrary state- 
ment. Thus, as early as May 1760, Governor Dobbs of North 
Carolina, appealed to the kingfor greater authority that he might 
"prevent the rising spirit of independency stealing into this pro- 
vince."* But such expressions would clearly be "all amiss inter- 
preted" in any effort to prove from them that their writers even 
dreamed of separation from the British Empire. Even so acute a 
political thinker as Thomas Jefferson declared that before the 
battle of Lexington, April 19, 1775, he had never heard a whisper 
of a desire to separate from the mother country; and Washington 
confessed that when he took command of the army, July 3, 1775, 
he "abhorred the idea of independence." The first statesman of 
weight and influence to conceive the idea of independence, with a 
fixed and definite purpose to pursue it, was Samuel Adams, and 
we have his own word for it that he made up his mind during the 
summer of 1768. The movement, therefore, began definitely with 
the Stamp Act, and this is the logical starting point of this inquiry. 

The principles on which the Americans opposed the Stamp Act 
were not hatched out for the occasion. They had long been 

'Colonial Records oi North Carolina, VI., 251 



[ 5 ] 

regarded as lying at the very basis of the colonial governments; in- 
deed, they were incorporated into their polity by the very charters 
which created them. The charters of North Carolina, for instance, 
guaranteed to the people "all liberties, franchises and privileges" 
possessed andenjoj^ed by their fellow-subjects in the realm of Eng- 
land.* Adherence to these charters and resistance to their per- 
version were cardinal principles with the early Carolinians and 
their records are replete with appeals to them against the encroach- 
ments of the proprietary and royal authorities throughout their 
colonial history. As early as 1678, "when a few families were 
struggling into a consciousness of statehood along the wide 
waters of our eastern sounds," the Assembly declared that "the 
doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary power and oppres- 
sion is absurd, slavish and destructive to the good and happiness 
of mankind."! In 1716 when the colony was but little more than 
fifty years old and the population all told was less than ten thou- 
sand souls, the Assembly entered on their journal the declaration 
"that the impressing of the inhabitants, or their property, under 
the pretence of its being for the public service, without authority 
from the Assembly, was unwarrantable and a great infringement 
upon the liberty of the subject. "$ A still more distinct statement 
of the principles of the Revolution was made in 1754? when the 
Assembly resolved that an attempt by the Council to amend an 
appropriation bill levying a tax "tends to infringe the rights and 
liberties of the Assembly who have always enjoyed uninterrupted 
the privilege of framing and modelling all bills by virtue of which 
money has been levied on the subject as an aid for his Majesty. "§ 
Moreover a committee of the Assembly protested to the governor 
against the Navigation Acts both as burdensome to the trade of 
the province, and as levying taxes on the people against what 
they esteemed their inherited right and exclusive privilege of impos- 
ing their taxes through their own representatives.il A few years 
later Governor Dobbs wrote that the Assembly openly set him and 
the king's instructions at defiance on the express ground "that 
their charters still subsisted," and declared that when the royal 

* Colonial Records of North Carolina, I. 25, 107. 

tCo/. Rec. Prefatory Notes, IX., p. XI. 

$Saunders: Lessons from our North Carolina Records, p. 7. 

§Col. Rec. V. 287. 

ySaunders: Col. Rec. Pref. Notes, IX. p. XI. 



[ 6 ] 

instructions diflfered from their charters, the latter and not the 
former was their rule of action.* "The key to North Carolina 
character in this inchoate period," as Dr. Edwin A. Alderman 
says, "is the subordination of everything — material prosperity, 
personal ease, financial development — to the remorseless assertion 
of the sacredness of chartered rights."! 

The ministry therefore no sooner asserted the constitutional 
authority of Parliament to levy taxes on the colonists, than the 
people of North Carolina denied it. Their contest, however, 
before the outbreak of hostilities was for constitutional govern- 
ment within the British Empire, though a few far-sighted leaders 
soon began to think of independence as possibly the ultimate 
solution of their political troubles with the mother country. 
Among the leaders of North Carolina who foresaw it, first place 
must be assigned to William Hooper. On April 26, 1774, in a 
letter to James Iredell, Hooper made this remarkable forecast of 
the political tendencies of the time: 

"With you I anticipate the important share which the colonies must 
soon have in regulating the political balance. They are striding fast to 
independence, and ere long will build an empire upon the ruins of Great 
Britain, will adopt its constitution purged of its impurities, and from an 
experience of its defects will guard against those evils which have wasted 
its vigor and brought it to an untimely end. ... Be it our endeavour 
to guard against every measure that may have a tendency to prevent 
so desirable an end."$ 

In the same prophetic vein Samuel Johnston a few months later, 
September 23, referring more specifically^ than Hooper to the 
quarrel with the mother countrj^ wrote to a friend in London: 

"The ministry from the time of passing the Declaratory Act, on the 
repeal of the Stamp Act, seem to have used every opportunity of teasing 
and fretting the people here as if on purpose to draw the people into 
rebellion or some violent opposition to government; at a time when the 
inhabitants of Boston were, every man, quietly employed about their 
own private affairs, the wise members of your House of Commons oa 
the authority of ministerial scribbles, declare they are in a state of open 
rebellion. On the strength of this they pass a set of laws which from 
their severity and injustice cannot be carried into execution but by a 
military force, which they have very wisely provided, being conscious 

*Col. Rec, VI.. 1261. 

tAlderman: William Hooper, p. 13. 

tCol. Rec. IX. 983-86. 



[ 'T ] 

that no people who had once tasted the sweets of freedom would ever 
submit to them except in the last extremity. They have now brought 
things to a crisis and God only knows where it will end. It is useless in 
disputes between different countries to talk about the right which one 
has to give laws to the other, as that generally attends the power, though 
where that power is wantonly or cruelly exercised there are instances 
where the weaker state has resisted w^ith success; for when once the 
sword is drawn all nice distinctions fall to the ground; the difference 
between internal and external taxation will be little attended to, and it 
will hereafter be considered of no consequence whether the act be to regu- 
late trade or raise a fund to support a majority in the House of Com- 
mons. By this desperate push the ministry will either confirm their 
power of making laws to bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever, or 
give up the right of making laws to bind them in any case."* 

Johnston's letter is more to the point than Hooper's; for while 
Hooper wrote in a speculative, academic vein, basing his conclu- 
sions upon a fancied analogy between the Roman Empire in its 
decline and the British Empire, Johnston was discussing the 
specific issues in dispute between the two countries, and, as events 
subsequently showed, correctly pointed out their logical result. 
He regarded thedispute as one "between different countries," and 
looked to separation and revolution for the salvation of the 
weaker. 

These utterances, however, expressed political judgment rather 
than sentiment, for neither Hooper nor Johnston at that time 
desired independence. Nor did their judgment express the general 
sentiment of the colony. This sentiment found more accurate 
expression in the proceedings of the local meetings which were 
held in the various counties during the summer of 1774 to elect 
delegates to the Provincial Congress, and to adopt instructions 
to them. These instructions invariably required the delegates to 
take a firm stand for the constitutional rights of the colonists, 
but at the same time most of them professed the utmost loyalty 
to the king. Rowan county, for instance, August 8, instructed its 
delegates to make a declaration that the people of Rowan were 
ready at any time to defend with their lives and fortunes "his 
Majesty's right and title to the Crown of Great Britain and his 
Dominion in America; "t while Johnston county, four days later, 
declared "that his Majesty's subjects in North America owe the 

*CoI. Rec. IX. 107^-72 
^Col. Rec. IX. 1024. 



[ 8 ] 

same allegiance to the Crown of Great Britain that is due from 
his subjects in that kingdom or elsewhere."* But both meetings 
were equally emphatic in claiming for the king's subjects in 
America "the same rights and liberties that his subjects in the 
Kingdom of Great Britain" enjoyed; hence they regarded taxa- 
tion by Parliament as unjust, oppressive and unconstitutional, 
and thought it ought to be resisted. These professions of loyalty 
and claims to immunity from taxation by Parliament, are typical 
of the sentiment prevailing in the local meetings, and it is not 
necessary to quote others.! Besides, the Provincial Congress, 
August 27, spoke for the province as a whole when it resolved 
"to maintain the succession of the House of Hanover as b}' law 
established," and avowed "inviolable and unshaken fidelitj^" to 
George Ill.t 

While these expressions undoubted!}' represent the general senti- 
ment of the colony at that time, they are less significant than 
other utterances which point to the change unconsciously work- 
ing in the minds of men. The first Provincial Congress, for 
instance, was the result of John Harvey's demand for "a conven- 
tion independent of the governor; "§ and the general meeting at 
Wilmington, July 21, which issued the call for a congress, empha- 
sized the "constitutional liberties of America," but neglected to 
make any mention of allegiance or loyalty to the king. II Anson 
county, August 18, also omitted a profession of loyalty to the 
Crown though denouncing in vigorous language "the late arbi- 
trary and cruel acts of the British Parliament and other uncon- 
stitutional and oppressive measures of the British Ministry. "H 
More significant than either were the instructions of Pitt county. 
Pitt's delegates were instructed to make "a declaration of Ameri- 
can rights," and, while acknowledging "due subjection to the 
the Crown of England," to make it equally clear that in sub- 
mitting to the authoritj' of the king, the Americans did so "by 
their own voluntary act," and were entitled to enjoy "all their 
free chartered rights and liberties as British free subjects. "° But 

*Col. Rec , IX., 1031. 

tCo7. Rec, IX., 1037, 1038, 1104. 

%Col. Rec, IX., 1044. 

^Col. Rec, IX., 968. 

\\Col. Rec, IX., 1016. 

%Col. Rec, IX., 1032. 

°Co}. Rec, IX.. 1030. 



[ 9 ] 

surpassing all other resolutions in the clearness and accuracy 
with which they stated the American idea, and reaching the most 
advanced ground attained in North Carolina during the year 
1774, were the instructions of Granville county, adopted August 
15. They declared "that those absolute rights which we are 
entitled to as men, by the immutable laws of nature, are ante- 
cedent to all social and relative duties whatsoever; that by the 
civil compact subsisting between our king and his people, alle- 
giance is the right of the first magistrate, and protection the right 
of the people; that a violation of this compact would rescind the 
civil institution binding both king and people together."* 

Political sentiment in North Carolina, therefore, during the year 
1774 reached this point: The people owe and acknowledge alle- 
giance to the king, but in return for this allegiance the king owes 
protection to the people; if either violates the "civil compact" 
subsisting between them, the other is released from all obliga- 
tions to maintain it; however, the acts of which the people now 
complain are not the acts of the king, but of a corrupt Parliament 
and a venal and t\^rannical ministry; the people are convinced 
that the king, if only they could reach the royal ears with their 
grievances, would throw the mantle of his protection around 
them ; and therefore they determined, in the words of the Gran- 
ville resolutions: "Although we are oppressed, we will still adhere 
to the civil obligation exacting our allegiance to the best of kings, 
as we entertain a most cordial affection to his Majesty's person." 

A severe blow was dealt this position with the opening of the 
year 1775. In February the two houses of Parliament presented 
an address to the king declaring the colonies in rebellion, and 
assuring his Majesty of their determination to support him in his 
efforts to suppress it; and the king returning his thanks for their 
loyal address, called for an increase of both the land and naval 
forces to be used in America. A few months later those who held 
that the king was not responsible for the acts of Parliament were 
still further shaken in their position by the announcement that 
he was hiring Hessians for service against the Americans; and in 
October they were driven completely from their ground by his 
proclamation declaring the colonists out of his protection. 

*Col. Rec, IX., 1034. 



[ 10 ] 

The effect of these measures on the development of sentiment 
for independence is marked, first in the opinion of individual 
leaders, afterwards in the utterances of public assemblies. On 
April 7, just after the adjournment of the second Provincial Con- 
gress and the dissolution of the last Assembly held under royal 
authority, Governor Martin, in a letter to Lord Dartmouth, 
assured his lordship that he had taken every measure in his 
power "to resist the growth of a most daring spirit of sedition 
and disorder that is gaining ground here very fast. ... I am 
bound in conscience and duty to add, my Lord," he continued, 
"that government is here as absolutely prostrate as impotent, 
and that nothing but the shadow of it is left. ... I must 
further say, too, my Lord, that it is my serious opinion, which I 
communicate with the last degree of concern, that unless effectual 
measures such as British spirit may dictate are speedily taken 
there will not long remain a trace of Britain's dominion over 
these colonies."* Three months later Joseph Hewes considered 
himself "over head and ears in wdiat the ministry call rebellion," 
but felt "no compunction for the part he had taken," or for the 
number of "enemies lately slain in the battle at Bunker's Hill."t 
Another North Carolina Whig writing, July 31, to a business 
house in Edinburg, declared that "every American, to a man, is 
determined to die or be free," and though professing loyalty to 
the king and disclaiming a desire for independence, he closed his 
letter with the warning: "This country, without some step is 
taken, and that soon, will be inevitably lost to the mother coun- 
try. "$ Thomas McKnight, a Tory, believed there had been "from 
the beginning of the dispute a fixed design in some people's 
breasts to throw off every connection with Great Britain and to 
act for the future as totally'' independent. "§ After the king's 
proclamation in October, Hewes at Philadelphia entertained "but 
little expectation of reconciliation" and saw "scarcely a dawn of 
hope that it will take place; "II and thought that independence 
would come soon "if the British ministry pursue their present 
diabolical scheme. "H The year 1775 closed in North Carolina 

*CoL Rec, IX., 1214-15. 

^Col. Rec, X., 86. 

iCol.Rec, X., 123. 

%Col. Rec, X., 249. 

WCol.Rec. X., 315. 

^[Hazeltoii: The Declaration of Independence; Its History, 31. 



[ 11 ] 

with the publication of a remarkable open letter addressed to 
"The Inhabitants of the United Colonies," and signed by one who 
called himself "A British American." He reviewed the causes of 
the dispute with the mother country; declared that the colonies 
had been forced against their wishes into a "just, necessary and 
honourably defensive war;" and maintained that 

"There is yet a way open for us, not only to escape the threatened 
ruin, but to become a happy, wealthy and respectable people. If it be 
asked how this great work is to be effected, I answer: 

"First, by declaring an immediate independency; 

"Secondly, by holding forth, to all the Powers of Europe, a general 
neutrality; 

"Thirdly, by immediately opening all our ports, and declaring them free 
to every European Power, except Great Britain, and inviting foreigners 
to purchase our commodities, and to furnish us with arms, ammunition, 
and such manufactures as we cannot, as yet, furnish ourselves with, 
which we cannot do with any prospect of success, so long as w^e 
retain even but the shadow of dependence on, or subjection to Great 
Britain. . . . 

"We must separate, or become the laboring slaves of Britain, which 
we disdain to be. . . . These things, I hope, will be duly considered 
by every inhabitant of America, as they are recommended to them to 
show the absurdity of continuing to petition and address, while our 
towns are inflames, and our inhabitants murdered, rather than separate 
from a cruel, blood-thirsty people, the cause of all our woes."* 

Men of course are more radical in expressing their opinions in 
private than in public assemblies and official documents. It will 
be found, therefore, that during the year 1775 the sentiment of 
public assemblies, though much in advance of the sentiment of 
1774', was more conservatively expressed than the private opin- 
ions of the leaders might lead us to expect. On April 6, 1775, the 
Assembly of the province, in reply to a message from the governor 
reminding them of their duty to the king, declared that "the 
Assembly of North Carohna have the highest sense of the alle- 
giance due to the king; the oath so repeatedly taken by them to 
that purpose made it unnecessary for them to be reminded of it;" 
at the same time, however, they called the governor's attention 
to the fact the king "was by the same constitution that estab- 
lished that allegiance and enjoined that oath, happily for his 
subjects, solemnly bound to protect them in all their just rights 

•Force's American Archives, 4th Series, IV., 470-73. 



[ 12 ] 

and privileges by which a reciprocal duty became incumbent upon 
both."* 

This declaration was made before the people had heard of the 
address of Parliament in February and the king's reply declaring 
them in rebellion. How quicklj' they assumed that the with- 
drawal of protection by the sovereign released the subject from 
the obligations of allegiance is made manifest by the Mecklenburg 
Resolutions of May 31. "Whereas," so runs this striking docu- 
ment, "by an address presented to his Majesty by both houses oi 
Parliament in February last, the American colonies are declared 
to be in a state of actual rebellion, we conceive that all laws and 
commissions confirmed by or derived from the authority of the 
king and Parliament are annulled and vacated and the former 
civil constitution of these colonies for the present wholly sus- 
pended;" therefore, it was resolved that "the Provincial Congress 
of each province under the direction of the great Continental 
Congress is invested with all legislative and executive powers 
within their respective provinces, and that no other legislative or 
executive power does or can exist at this time in any of these 
colonies." Under these circumstances it was thought necessary to 
inaugurate a new county government, to organize the militia, 
and to elect officials "who shall hold and exercise their several 
powers by virtue of this choice and independent of the Crown of 
Great Britain and former constitution of this province." These 
resolves and this organization were declared to be "in full force 
and virtue until instructions from the Provincial Congress regu- 
lating the jurisprudence of the province shall provide otherwise 
or the legislative body of Great Britain resign its unjust and arbi- 
trary pretensions with respect to America. "t 

Studied in connection with the development of the sentiment 
for independence, in which they form a most important link, these 
resolutions appear far more logical and significant than the 
alleged Declaration of May 20. A Declaration of Independence 
by a single county, at a time when both the Provincial and the 
Continental Congresses were professing the utmost loj-altyto the 
Crown, appears to be but little more than rhetoric; but a series 
of resolves outlining a county government to take the place of 

*Col. Rec, IX., 1198. 
tCo7. Rec, IX., 1282-84. 



[ 13 ] 

that which had been annulled until the proper authority, the 
Provincial Congress, should provide otherwise, was a wise, 
proper and statesman-like procedure. Of the two, therefore, the 
latter seems far more creditable to the wisdom and patriotism of 
the Mecklenburg patriots. 

The day after the meeting at Charlotte, the Rowan committee, 
which had declared a year before that they were ready to die in 
defence of the king's title to his American dominions, resolved, 
"that by the constitution of our government we are a free 
people;" that the constitution "limits both sovereignty and alle- 
giance," and "that it is our ditty to surrender our lives before our 
constitutional privileges to any set of men upon earth."* And, 
finally, in August, just before the meeting of the Provincial Con- 
gress, Tryon county resolved to bear true allegiance to the king, 
but only "so long as he secures to us those rights and liberties 
which the principles of our constitution require."t 

Thus it seems clear that when the Provincial Congress met in 
August, 1775, the entire province had reached the advanced 
ground on which Granville county stood in August of 1774. But 
just as these local assemblies were more conservative in express- 
ing their sentiments than individuals, so the Provincial Congress 
was more conservative than the local assemblies, though both 
were controlled largely by the same men. This Congress, Sep- 
tember 8, unanimously adopted an address to "The Inhabitants 
of the British Empire," in which they said: 

"To enjoy the fruits of our own honest industry; to call that our own 
which we earn with the labor of our hands and the sweat of our brows; 
to regulate that internal policy by which we and not they [Parliament] 
are to be affected; these are ttfe mighty boons we ask. And traitors, 
rebels, and every harsh appellation that malice can dictate or the viru- 
lence of language express, are the returns which we receive to the most 
humble petitions and earnest supplication. We have been told that 
independence is our object; that we seek to shake off all connection with 
the parent state. Cruel suggestion ! Do not all our professions, all our 
actions, uniformly contradict this ? 

"We again declare, and we invoke that Almighty Being who searches 
the recesses ot the human heart and knows our most secret intentions, 
that it is our most earnest wish and prayer to be restored with the other 

*Col. Rec, X., 10-11. 

f Co/. Rec, X., 163. See also IX., 1149, 1160-64 ; X., 26, 29, 61, 171, and 
239. 



[ 14 ] 

United Colonies to the state in which we and they were placed before the 
year 1763. . . . 

"Whenever we have departed from the forms of the constitution, our 
own safety and self preservation have dictated the expedient; and if in 
any instances we have assumed powers which the laws invest in the 
sovereign or his representatives, it has been only in defence of our persons, 
properties and those rights which God and the constitution have made 
unalienably ours. As soon as the cause of our fears and apprehensions 
are removed, with joy we will return these powers to their regular chan- 
nels; and such institutions formed from mere necessity, shall end with 
that necessity that created them."* 

Soon after the adjournment of this Congress came news of the 
king's proclamation in October declaring the Americans out of 
his protection and commanding his armies and navy to levy war 
against them. After this nothing more is heard from public 
assemblies and conventions of loyalty to the Crown. Sentiment 
hastened rapidly towards independence. "My first wish is to be 
free," declared Hooper, a delegate in the Continental Congress; 
"my second to be reconciled to Great Britain. "t Six days later, 
February 12, 1776, John Penn, also a delegate in the Continental 
Congress, wrote to his friend Thomas Person: 

/ "I learn that Governor Martin has at length obtained his wishes; 
ladministration having agreed to send seven regiments to North Caro- 
jlina. ... I make no doubt the Southern Provinces will soon be the 
scene of action. ... I hope we to the Southward shall act like men 
determined to be free. . . . Should they [Parliament and the minis- 
try] presevere in their attempts to reduce us to a state of slavery by carry- 
ing on this unnatural war with fire and sword, we must determine to act 
with unanimity and assume every power of government for the purpose 
of legislation in order to be the better able to defend ourselves. . . . 
For God's sake, my dear sir, encourage our people; animate them to 
dare even to die for their country. "$ 

Two days later he took an even more advanced position. 

"Our dispute with Great Britain," he wrote, "grows serious indeed. 
Matters are drawing to a crisis. They seem determined to persevere 
and are forming alliances against us. Must we not do something of the 
like nature ? Can we hope to carry on a war without having trade or 
commerce somewhere ? Can we ever pay any taxes without it ? Will 
not our money depreciate if we go on emitting? These are serious 

*Col. Rec, X., 201. 

tAlderman: William Hooper, 40. 

tCol. Rec, X., 449. 



[ 15 ] 

things and require your consideration. The consequence of making alli- 
ances is perhaps a total separation with Britain and without something 
of that sort we may not be able to provide what is necessary for our 
defence."* 

And Hewes, writing from Congress to Samuel Johnston, March 
20, declared: 

"I see no prospects of reconciliation. Nothing is left but to fight it 
out. . . . Some among us urge strongly for independency and eternal 
separation; others wish to wait a little longer and to have the opinion 
of their constituents on that subject. You must give us the sentiments 
of your province when your convention meets, "t 

Thus spoke the three delegates in the Continental Congress; 
but in no respect were they in advance of their constituents. 
Samuel Johnston, writing March 3, expressed the opinion that 
the future might "offer a more favorable crisis for throwing off 
our connection with Great Britain;" but added: 

"It is, however, highly probable from anything that I have yet been 
able to learn of the disposition of the people at home, from the public 
papers, for I have not lately received any letters, that the colonies will 
be under the necessity of throwing off their allegiance to the king and 
Parliament of Great Britain this summer. If France and Spain are 
hearty and sincere in our cause, or sufficiently apprised of the importance 
of the connection with us to risk war vdth Great Britain, we shall 
undoubtedly succeed; if they are irresolute and play a doubtful game I 
shall not think our success so certain. "t 

Replying to Hewes's inquiry of March 20th, he said: 

"I am inclined to think with you that there is Httle prospect of an 
accommodation. You wish to know my sentiments on the subjects of 
treating with foreign powers and the independence of the Colonies. I 
have apprehensions that no foreign power will treat with us till we dis- 
claim our dependence on Great Britain and I would wish to have 
assurances that they would render us effectual service before we take 
that step. I have I assure you no other scruples on this head; the 
repeated insults and injuries we have received from the people of my 
native island has [sic] done away all my partiality for a connection 
with them and I have no apprehensions of our being able to establish 
and support an independence if France and Spain would join us cordially 
and risque a war with Great Britain in exchange for our trade. "§ 

*Col. Rec, X., 4.56. 

fState Records of North Carolina, XI., 288-9. 

JMs. letter in the Library at "Hayes." Copy in the collections of the North 
Carolina Historical Commission 

§Ms. letter in the Library at "Hayes." Copy in the collections of the North 
Carolina Historical Commission. 



[ 16 ] 

In a letter written from Petersburg, Virginia, April 12tli, the 
writer says: 

"From several letters that I have received from North Carolina since 
that convention met, 1 find thej^ are for independence, as they either 
have, or intend to repeal the instructions that were given to their dele- 
gates, and to leave them at liberty to vote, upon every occasion, as they 

may think best. Mr. was some little time at Halifax. He says they 

are quite spirited and unanimous ; indeed, I hear nothing praised but 
'Common Sense' and Independence. The people of North Carolina are 
making great preparations, and they are determined to die hard."* 

On April 14 Hooper and Penn arrived at Halifax from Phila- 
delphia. Three days later Hooper wrote to Hewes, who had 
remained at Philadelphia, and Penn wrote to John Adams, 
describing the situation as they found it in Virginia and North 
Carolina: 

"My progress through Virginia," said Hooper, "was marked with 
nothing extraordinary. . . . The language of Virginia is uniformly 
for independence. If there is a single man in that province w^ho preaches 
a different doctrine I had not the fortune to fall in his company. But 
rapid as the change has been in Virginia, North Carolina has the honour 
of goingfar before them. Our late instructions aff"ord you somespecimen 
of the temper of the present Congress and of the people at large. It 
would be more than unpopular, it would be Toryism, to hint the possi- 
bility of future reconciliation. For my part if it were my sentiment that 
such conduct was premature, I should not think it prudent to avow it. 
We cannot stem a current and one had better swim on the democratic 
flood than vainly attempting to check it be buried in it. . . . Britain 
has lost us by a series of impolitic, wicked and savage actions as would 
have disgraced a nation of Hottentots. Human patience can bear no 
more and all ranks of people cry, 'that the cup of bitterness is full and 
running over. Let the miseries of separation be what they will they 
cannot enhance our misery. We may be better, we cannot be worse.' 
Thus they reason and when I survey what has been done I have too 
much the feelings of a man to attempt to reason them out of this effu- 
sion."! 

Likewise wrote Penn: 

"As I came through Virginia I found the inhabitants desirous to be 
independent from Great Britain. However, they were willing to submit 
their opinion on the subject to whatever the General Congress should 
determine. North Carolina by far exceeds them occasioned by the great 

•Force's American Archives, 4th Series, V., p. 862. 

tMs. letter in the Library at "Hayes." Copy in the collections of the North 
Carolina Historical Commission. 



[ IT ] 

fatigue, trouble and danger the people here have undergone for sometime 
past. Gentlemen of the first fortune in the province have marched as 
common soldiers; and to encourage and give spirit to the men have 
footed it the whole time. Lord Cornwallis with seven regiments is 
expected to visit us everyday. Clinton is now in Cape Fear with Gover- 
nor Martin, who had about forty sail of vessels, armed and unarmed, 
waiting his arrival. The Highlanders and Regulators are not to be 
trusted. Governor Martin has coaxed a number of slaves to leave their 
masters in the lower parts; everything base and wicked is practiced by 
him. These things have wholly changed the temper and disposition of 
the inhabitants that are friends to liberty; all regard or fondness for the 
king or nation of Britain is gone; a total separation is what they want. 
Independence is the word most used. They ask if it is possible that any 
colony after what has passed can wish for a reconciliation ? The con- 
vention have tried to get the opinion of the people at large. I am told 
that in many counties there was not one dissenting voice."* 

Thus In letters, in conversations by the fireside and at the 
cross-roads, in newspapers, and in pubhc assemblies, the Whig 
leaders worked steadily to mould public sentiment in favor of a 
Declaration of Independence. But the crowning arguments that 
converted thousands to this view were the guns of Caswell and 
Lillington at Moore's Creek Bridge in the early morning hours of 
February 27, and the black hulks of Sir Henry Clinton's men-of- 
war as they rode at anchor below Brunswick. Moore's Creek 
Bridge, says Frothingham, "was the Lexington and Concord of 
that region. The newspapers circulated the details of this bril- 
liant result. The spirits of the Whigs ran high. 'You never,' one 
wrote, 'knew the like in your life for true patriotism.' "t In the 
midst of this excitement the Provincial Congress met, April 4, at 
Halifax. The next day Samuel Johnston wrote: "All our people 
here are up for independence;"! and added a few days later: "We 
are going to the devil . . . without knowing how to help 
ourselves, and though many are sensible of this, yet they would 
rather go that way than to submit to the British ministry. . . 
Our people are full of the idea of independence. "§ "Independence 

•Quoted by Swain in "The British Invasion in 1776," published in Cooke's 
" Revolutionary History of North Carolina," p., 125. There incorrectly dated 
as April 7, 1776. See Hazelton's "Declaration of Independence," pp. 83, 402. 

fThe Rise of the Republic, p. 503. 

JMcRee's Life and Correspondence of James Iredell, I., p. 275. 

§Ms. letter in Library at "Hayes." Copy in the collections of the North 
Carolina Historical Commission. 



[ 18 ] 

seems to be the word," wrote General Robert Howe; "I know 
not one dissenting voice."* 

To this position, then, within a year, the king had driven his 
faithful subjects of North Carolina and they now expected their 
Congress to give formal and public expression to their senti- 
ments. When Hooper and Penn arrived at Halifax they found 
that the Congress had already spoken. On April 8, six daj's 
before their arrival, a committee was appointed, composed of 
Cornelius Harnett, Allen Jones, Thomas Burke, Abner Nash, John 
Kinchen, Thomas Person, and Thomas Jones, "to take into con- 
sideration the usurpations and violences attempted and com- 
mitted by the king and Parliament of Britain against America, 
and the further measures to be taken for frustrating the same, 
and for the better defence of this province. "t After deliberating 
for four days, on April 12th this committee, through its chair- 
man, Cornelius Harnett, submitted its report, of which he was the 
author. "In ringing sentences, not unworthy of Burke or Pitt," 
says Dr. Smith, "the report set forth in a short preamble the 
usurpations of the British ministry and 'the moderation hitherto 
manifested by the United Colonies.' Then came the declaration 
which to those who made it meant long 3'^ears of desolating war, 
smoking homesteads, widowed mothers, and fatherless children, 
but to tis and our descendants a heritage of imperishable glory."| 
This is the report which Cornelius Harnett read and the Congress 
unanimously adopted: 

"It appears to your committee, that pursuant to the plan concerted by 
the British ministry for subjugating America, the king and Parliament 
of Great Britain have usurped a power over the persons and properties 
of the people unlimited and uncontrolled; and disregarding their humble 
petitions for peace, liberty and safety, have made divers legislative acts, 
denouncing war, famine, and every species of calamity, against the con- 
tinent in general. That British fleets and armies have been, and still are 
daily employed in destroying the people, and committing the most hor- 
rid devastations on the country. That governors in different colonies 
have declared protection to slaves who should imbrue their hands in the 
blood of their masters. That ships belonging to America are declared 
prizes of w^ar, and many of them have been violently seized and confis- 

*Hazelton: Declaration of Independence, p. 84. 
^Col. Rec, X., 504. 

$C. Alphonso Smith: Our Debt to Cornelius Harnett: North Carolina Univer- 
sity Magazine, May, 1907, p. 392. 



[ 19 ] 

cated. lu consequence of all which multitudes of people have been 
destroyed, or from easy circumstances reduced to the most lamentable 
distress. 

"And whereas the moderation hitherto manifested by the United Colo- 
nies and their sincere desire to be reconciled to the mother country on 
constitutional principles, have procured no mitigation of the aforesaid 
wrongs and usurpations, and no hopes remain of obtaining redress by 
those means alone which have been hitherto tried, your committee are 
of opinion that the house should enter into the following resolve, to-wit; 

"Resolved, That the delegates for this colony in the Continental Con- 
gress be impowered to concur with the delegates of the other colonies in 
declaring independency, and forming foreign alliances, reserving to this 
colony the sole and exclusive right of forming a constitution and laws 
for this colony, and of appointing delegates from time to time (under the 
direction of a general representation thereof,) to meet the delegates of 
the other colonies for such purposes as shall be hereafter pointed out."* 

"Thus," declares Frothingham, "the popular party carried 
North Carolina as a unit in favor of independence, when the 
colonies from New England to Virginia were in solid array 
against it."t Comment is unnecessary. The actors, the place, 
the occasion, the time, the action itself, tell their own story. 
"The American Congress," declared Bancroft, "needed an impulse 
from the resolute spirit of some colonial convention, and the 
example of a government springing wholly from the people. . . 
The word which South Carolina hesitated to pronounce was 
given by North Carolina. That colony, proud of its victory over 
domestic enemies, and roused to defiance by the presence of 
Clinton, the British general, in one of their rivers, .... 
unanimously" voted for separation. "North Carolina was the 
first colony to vote explicit sanction to independence. "$ This 
Resolution of April 12, therefore, and not the "Mecklenburg 
Declaration" of May 20, nor the Mecklenburg Resolves of May 
31, is the true basis for "the claims of those who would give the 
'Old North State' priority in this bold and important step." 

A copy of the resolution was immediately hurried off to Joseph 
Hewes at Philadelphia. § Its effect on the movement for inde- 
pendence in the other colonies was felt at once. "This was a 

*CoI. Rec, X., 512. 
tr/je Rise of the Republic, p. 504. 

XHistory of the United States, ed. 1S60, Vol. VIII., pp. 345-352. The lan- 
guage, but not the sense, is slightly modified in later editions. 
^Col. Rec, X., 495, 604. 



[ 20 ] 

move of the greatest importance," says Elson, "and it was but a 
short time until Rhode Island and then Massachusetts followed 
the example of their Southern sister."* Frothingham declares: 
"The example was warmly welcomed by the patriots, and com- 
mended for imitation."! The correspondence of the period bears 
out his statement. The newspapers printed the resolution and 
held it up to the other colonies as an example to be followed. 
The leaders in the Continental Congress hastened to lay it before 
their constituents. Samuel Adams, the foremost man in America 
in fostering the sentiment for independence, wrote, April 30, to a 
friend in Boston: 

"The idea of independence spreads far and wide among the colonies. 
Many of the leading men see the absurdity of supposing that allegiance 
is due to a sovereign who has already thrown us out of his protection. . 
The convention of North Carolina has. . . . revoked certain instruc- 
tions which tied the hands of their delegates here. Virginia, whose con- 
vention is to meet on the 3d of next month, will follow the lead. . . . 
We cannot make events: our business is wisely to improve them. . . . 
Mankind are governed more by their feelings than by reason. Events 
which excite those feelings will produce wonderful events. The Boston 
Port Bill suddenly wrought an union of the colonies w^hich could not 
have been brought about by the industry of years in reasoning on the 
necessity of it for the common safety. . . ' . The burning of Norfolk 
and the hostilities committed in North Carolina have kindled the resent- 
ment of our Southern brethren, who once thought their Eastern friends 
hot-headed and rash. Now, indeed, the tone is altered, and it is said that 
the coolness and moderation of the one is necessary to allay the heat of 
the other. There is reason that would induce one to wish for the speedy 
arrival of the British troops that are expected at the Southward. I 
think our friends are well prepared for them, and one battle would do 
more towards a Declaration of Independence than a long chain of con- 
clusive arguments in a Provincial Convention or the Continental Con- 
gress. "t 

The next day, May 1, Elbridge Gerry, another of the delegates 
from Massachusetts in the Continental Congress, wrote with 
reference to independence: 

"I am glad you approve the proposals for instructions, and can with 
pleasure inform you that North Carolina has taken off frcm their Isic] 
delegates the restrictions relative to this matter, and as I am informed, 

*mstory of the United States, p. 252. 

fT/ie Rise of the Republic, p. 504. 

fWells: The Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams, Vol. 2, pp. 294-6. 



[ 21 ] 

has left them at liberty to vote for a final separation from Great Bri- 
tain."* 

The 28tli of the same month, after Virginia had followed the 
example of North Carolina, he wrote: 

"Some days since I enclosed to our worthy friend Major Hawley 
sundry newspapers containing intelligence of importance, but not so 
agreeable in its nature as the enclosed papers announce relative to our 
sister colonies of Virginia and North Carolina. Their conventions have 
unanimously declared for independency, and have in this respect exceeded 
their sister colonies in a most noble and decisive measure. I hope it will 
be forthwith communicated to your honorable Assembly, and hope to 
see my native colony follow this laudable example."! 

Three days later he recurred again to the same subject: 

"The conviction which the late measures of administration have 
brought to the minds of doubting persons has such an effect, that I 
think the colonies cannot long remain an independent depending people, 
but that they will declare themselves as their interest and safety have 
long required, entirely separated from the prostituted government of 
Great Britain. . . . The principal object of our attention at this 
important time, I think, should be the manufacturing arms, lead and 
clothing, and obtaining flints, for I suppose since the measures adopted 
by North Carolina and Virginia that there cannot remain a doubt with 
our Assembly of the propriety of declaring for independency, and there- 
fore that our thoughts will be mostly directed to the means for support- 
ing it."t 

May 29 Caesar Rodney, a delegate from Delaware, wrote to 
Thomas Rodney: 

"The colonies of North Carolina and Virginia have both by their 
conventions declared for Independence by a unanimous vote; and have 
instructed their members to move and vote for it in Congress. "§ 

Perhaps no man welcomed with greater joy the example of 
North Carolina in moving for independence than John Adams, 
the great "Colossus of Independence." Writing May 29 to a 
friend in regard to the British vessels in Boston harbor, he said: 

"I am much pleased with your spirited project of driving away the 
wretches from the harbor, and never shall be happy till I hear it is done, 
and the very entrance fortified impregnably. I cannot bear that an 

•Austin: The Life of Elbridge Gerry, p. 178. 
^Ibid.i pp. 180-1. 

JHazelton: The Declaration of Independence, p. 107. 
%Ibid.: 425. 



[ 22 ] 

unfriendly flag should be in sight of Beacon Hill. You are 'checked by 
accounts from the Southward, of a disposition in a great majority to 
counteract independence.' Read the proceedings of Georgia, South and 
North Carolina, and Virginia, and then judge."* 

And again, June 1, he wrote to Isaac Smith: 

"Your observations upon the oppressive severity of the old regula- 
tions of trade . . . are very just. But if you consider the resolution 
of Congress, and that of Virginia of the 15th of May, the resolutions of 
the tw^o Carolinas and Georgia, each of which colonies are instituting 
new governments under the authority of the people, ... I believe 
you will be convinced that there is little probabilitj' of our ever again 
coming under the yoke of British regulations of trade."! 

Thus was the example of North Carolina welcomed In' the 
advocates of independence who urged their constituents to follow 
her lead. Virginia did so May 15, and on the 27th of the same 
month, just after Joseph Hewes had presented to the Continental 
Congress the resolution of the North Carolina Congress, the 
delegates from Virginia presented their instructions.! Virginia 
had gone one step further than North Carolina, for while the 
latter "impowered" her delegates to "concur" with the other 
colonies in declaring independence, the former "instructed" her 
representatives to "propose" it. Hence it was that Richard 
Henry Lee, of Virginia, and not Joseph Hewes, of North Carolina, 
won the distinction of moving "that these United Colonies are 
and of right ought to be free and independent States." 

The Provincial Congress properly referred to the Continental 
Congress the question of declaring independence instead of mak- 
ing a declaration for North Carolina alone. Nevertheless, after 
April 12, 1776, the Provincial Congress proceeded on the assump- 
tion that they had finally severed their political relations with the 
British Empire. On April 13 the Congress ordered that if any per- 
sons appointed by thekingunder the act of Parliament providing 
for the appointment of commissioners to offer terms of reconcilia- 
tion to the Americans, should arrive in North Carolina without a 
commission to treat with the Continental Congress, the^^ should 
be required to return immediately on board the vessels that 
brought them; and if the^^ refused they were to be arrested and 

»C. F. Adams: The Works of John Adams, IX., 379. 

^Ibid.: IX., 383. 

JFord: Journals of the Continental Congress, IV., 397. 



[ 23 ] 

sent to the Continental Congress. On the same day a committee 
was appointed to draft a constitution for the new State, trailing 
to agree on this, the Congress decided to remodel the provisional 
government which had been in operation since October, 1775, and 
in recognition of the altered relations existing now between North 
Carolina and the British Crown, struck out the word "Provin- 
cial," from the name of the executive branch of the government 
changing it from "Provincial Council" to "Council of Safety." 
Finally a test was prescribed for volunteers in the armj^ by which 
the soldier bound himself to "be faithful and true to the United 
Colonies;" to serve them to the utmost of his power "in defence of 
the just rights of America against all enemies whatsoever;" and 
to lay down his arms peaceably when required to do so by the 
Continental Congress. This was the first test prescribed by the 
Provincial Congress in which no mention was made of the king. 
Parliament, or the British Empire. The Congress recognized that 
while the province was not independent in name, it was so in 
fact. The Declaration of Independence in July, therefore, was the 
official recognition of a condition which had existed in North 
Carolina since April 12, 1776. 



• '• ^v 









^:.;';^^' °- //^<>- ^°*:^^%"- .^^^-^i'X 









x/ 



*^,>* /Jife': X/ .'^"«. %.** .*: 




^v ov .y^a>0J;* ^v -^^^ -^^aE?,* .^-^-^ V. ^^ 










: "^o^ 













.'^ C»"«4 '^^ ** .O^ .•^'•'. "^< 



- .^^ "'^^ ^r. 










^^..^^ .'AWA-o ^^..^^ /Jifo'v %..<^* /:^»^% v.^^ *^^ 



















«HO^ ., 













• A^ 



■» o 














^oV 








> .^^-n^ V 



.0 -^^ *r!^^:f/ ^^^ o^_ '-T:^-' .oO ' 'V '*"^-T* ^^^ 










.^•^■V. '. 







•^-^^'i' 



■^^<?- 






♦ aV '^^ 



































a " « - ^ 



•l*:?^?^-.'. ^ 



^0 t'^LJI* 'o. 






